Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

CI: use conda-forge on 3.6 build #15668

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

CI: use conda-forge on 3.6 build #15668

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

jreback
Copy link
Contributor

@jreback jreback commented Mar 12, 2017

No description provided.

@jreback jreback added the CI Continuous Integration label Mar 12, 2017
@jreback jreback added this to the 0.20.0 milestone Mar 12, 2017
@jreback
Copy link
Contributor Author

jreback commented Mar 12, 2017 •
edited
Loading

cc @zym1010
xref #15662 - build failures on scipy 0.19.0

cc @kernc
seems some failures on scipy 0.19.0 with object arrays in sparse (I guess warning < 0.19.0)

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Mar 12, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Merging #15668 into master will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #15668      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.03%   91.01%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         143      143              
  Lines       49382    49382              
==========================================
- Hits        44957    44946      -11     
- Misses       4425     4436      +11
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pandas/io/gbq.py 25% <0%> (-58.34%) ❌
pandas/tools/merge.py 93.61% <0%> (-0.34%) ❌
pandas/core/frame.py 97.87% <0%> (-0.1%) ❌

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 7c5ebd5...6a0d500. Read the comment docs.

kernc
kernc reviewed Mar 13, 2017
View reviewed changes
pandas/tests/sparse/test_frame.py Outdated
@@ -1132,7 +1132,7 @@ def test_isnotnull(self):
@pytest.mark.parametrize('dtype', [object, bool, int, float, np.uint16])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You might as well push something to remove this object. 😛

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should we just not test this at all (object I mean)? I don't actually have scipy 0.19.0 installed, so can't really test this.

Copy link
Contributor

@kernc kernc Mar 13, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For what I quickly tested (0.18.1) only simple methods and properties, like .tocoo(), .todok(), .dtype, .shape work with spmatrices of object dtype. While we do preserve this dtype if encountered, I see little harm in skipping it altogether.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok separated out the object test. skips on 0.19.0.

@jreback jreback closed this in 56b5a30 Mar 13, 2017
@jreback jreback mentioned this pull request Mar 13, 2017
Closed
AnkurDedania pushed a commit to AnkurDedania/pandas that referenced this pull request Mar 21, 2017
@jreback @AnkurDedania
TST: skip scipy tests for >= 0.19.0 as needed in interpolation / wind…
e17ba3d 
…ow / sparse

closes pandas-dev#15668
mattip pushed a commit to mattip/pandas that referenced this pull request Apr 3, 2017
@jreback @mattip
TST: skip scipy tests for >= 0.19.0 as needed in interpolation / wind…
c4bcfe2 
…ow / sparse

closes pandas-dev#15668
@WillAyd WillAyd mentioned this pull request Dec 18, 2017
Closed
16 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@kernc kernc kernc left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
CI Continuous Integration
Projects
None yet
Milestone
0.20.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@jreback @codecov-io @kernc